Should Doug Armstrong get fired if he can't get re-sign Pietrangelo?
- Thread starter Ranksu
- Start date
Louie the Blue
Because it's a trap
- Jul 27, 2010
- 4,762
- 3,099
No.
Winning the Cup doesn't mean he gets a free pass on everything (though it definitely buys him more time), but he hasn't done a bad job as GM in the decade he's been here.
Winning the Cup doesn't mean he gets a free pass on everything (though it definitely buys him more time), but he hasn't done a bad job as GM in the decade he's been here.
God awful extension. Thank God he's away.
Great extension, yeah? right?
Talking about great extensions what about Justin f***ing Faulk?
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19665332/1197967472.jpg.jpg)
I haven't buy it Scandella was right move. Long way from being good enough with Parayko. He's Edmundson's level player.
And I hope this last picture flash in your consciousness when Pietro walks away, 'cus Army didn't give him enough money.
LetsGoBLUES91
Registered User
- Jan 8, 2013
- 9,158
- 3,096
Most GMs would be fired on the spot for the Faulk trade and extension, but he used his get out of jail free card for that one.
I don't think you'd fire him if Pietrangelo walks. I would be frustrated if it was truly over less than 1 mil per year.
I don't think you'd fire him if Pietrangelo walks. I would be frustrated if it was truly over less than 1 mil per year.
67Blues
Got it for Bobby
Here is the real deal. When Faulk joined the team, he couldn't get his familiar number 27. So he complained and Army told him to just wait a year because he didn't want to have an unhappy Faulk so he'll take care of that issue. 
A happy Faulk is a productive Faulk.
A happy Faulk is a productive Faulk.
TheBluePenguin
Registered User
NO ONE and I mean NO ONE was expecting a flat cap, the Faulk extension is still bad either way but if the cap would have gone up 3 million we would have been in such a better spot. I have only wanted one thing being a fan of the Blues my entire life and Petro and Army gave that to me, I will not be mad at either of them if this deal doesn't work out. 2020 sucks no matter how you look at it.
To me it is going to come down to the exact thing I said about Albert, he would have to take less money to stay but he would be immortal here if he stays, The same thing for Petro, if he resigns here, he will get a state of him lifting the cup
EDIT: Let me emphasize I also do not blame athletes for taking the most money, there is a business aspect to this too, they only get a 10-15 year window to make there lifetime of money. I like my job but if someone offered me a 20% raise I would most likely leave too.
To me it is going to come down to the exact thing I said about Albert, he would have to take less money to stay but he would be immortal here if he stays, The same thing for Petro, if he resigns here, he will get a state of him lifting the cup
EDIT: Let me emphasize I also do not blame athletes for taking the most money, there is a business aspect to this too, they only get a 10-15 year window to make there lifetime of money. I like my job but if someone offered me a 20% raise I would most likely leave too.
Last edited:
Louie the Blue
Because it's a trap
- Jul 27, 2010
- 4,762
- 3,099
God awful extension. Thank God he's away.
Great extension, yeah? right?
Talking about great extensions what about Justin f***ing Faulk?
I haven't buy it Scandella was right move. Long way from being good enough with Parayko. He's Edmundson's level player.
And I hope this last picture flash in your consciousness when Pietro walks away, 'cus Army didn't give him enough money.
Are you going to exclude acquiring ROR for a bag of pucks?
Schenn for 2 1sts and Lehtera?
Signing Elliott?
Re-signing Perron (multiple times)?
Drafting Thomas, Parayko, Dunn,Blais, Binnington under his tenure?
Trading Reaves for Sunny and Kostin?
Trading for Shattenkirk and Bouwmeester?
Hiring Hitchcock?
The only major indictments I can think of against him is the Miller and Oshie trades.
None of the points you mentioned have a long term detrimental impact on the team-including Faulk. Faulk’s contract was handed out at a weird time but it won’t be why Petro isn’t brought back.
Allen’s contract wasn’t even that bad considering how inexpensive his backups were.
Armstrong may have made the greatest trade in Blues history by trading for ROR.
Celtic Note
Living the dream
- Dec 22, 2006
- 16,916
- 5,678
The Demitra trade is still the greatest of all time for the Blues. That was the most lopsided trade by far.
Christer Olsson amounted to nothing.
Christer Olsson amounted to nothing.
Agreed. I thought that was a Keenan trade, but I looked it up. It was Ron Caron, in a brief reprise as GM when Keenan was fired.
There is so many errors on this post that I don't have time to fix it, but best one was Jbo <-> Shattenkirk. Thanks for the laughs.
I disagree with you on the Faulk extension. That was the worst transaction of Armstrong's career. I agree with all your other points, though.
I'm not discrediting Armstrong, he's one of the top 10 GM's in the League, but rather pointing out that a lot of this stuff isn't black and white...
However, waiting for the perfect situation to arise is also a problem. How long were we waiting on a LD/centres before that? We done well that we were able to move Backes and Schenn there so effectively.
Signing Elliott was great. Then Bishop outplayed him in camp and Elliott got the spot. That worked out well since Elliott was absolutely lights out. We traded Bishop, for a good return under the circumstances, and then watched the organisation refuse to trust Elliott going forward. In 2013 we lost to the Kings in the first round; Elliott gave up one regulation goal in three games, two in two games and four in the other game. While it's true that Elliott gave up a couple of soft goals, the issue was goalscoring. Yet we do little to nothing to address goalscoring and are desperate to add Miller from that summer until it finally happens the next season. It's not just the Miller trade, it was the completely blinkered vision that made little sense in the circumstances.
However, if you're going to talk about Binnington, we should remember that management told Binnington that he had no future with the organisation a matter of months before being backed into the corner of starting him. That was 100% luck of circumstances. If Johnson isn't a dumpster fire, Binnington doesn't start. If Allen isn't a dumpster fire, Binnington doesn't start. If Husso isn't injured, Binnington doesn't start.
That Shattenkirk trade was handled poorly. One of the first things Bob McKenzie said is that other GM's around the League were annoyed because they didn't know EJ was available and didn't get to make an offer. We moved our highest value trade chip and got a RHD & RW, and then spent how many years struggling to compete because our centre depth was absolutely non-existant? I'm not going to praise that trade.
We did have a poster here that complained we didn't get ROR in the deal. It's probably a blessing that we didn't get ROR then, because I'm really not sure that it wouldn't have ended the same way here as it did in Colorado for him.
But, to be fair, we did also get "unlucky" with the EJ trade. If we don't go on an utterly meaningless winning streak in the last 10 games of the season then we were picking in the ~8 range and the first we gave up in the EJ trade get's pushed to 2012 (Jordan Schmaltz pick in the late first). If we're picking ~8 in 2011 then we're looking at Scheifele, Couturier or Hamilton.
Still, it worked out really well. If we'd have waited until after the following season then I'd hate to imagine the contract we'd be stuck with just now.
So much of a GM's work is very fine margins. Losing Pietrangelo to FA will make those margins even finer.
Armstrong is excellent at taking advantage of circumstances. The ROR and Bouwmeester trades were him expertly taking advantage of advantageous circumstances where a team had to trade a top player and we leveraged a position.
However, waiting for the perfect situation to arise is also a problem. How long were we waiting on a LD/centres before that? We done well that we were able to move Backes and Schenn there so effectively.
Two firsts that look like turning into two outstanding players for the Flyers. Trade worked out well for both sides, and we done well identifying Schenn.
No. The handling of our goaltending has been an absolute mess under Armstrong.
Signing Elliott was great. Then Bishop outplayed him in camp and Elliott got the spot. That worked out well since Elliott was absolutely lights out. We traded Bishop, for a good return under the circumstances, and then watched the organisation refuse to trust Elliott going forward. In 2013 we lost to the Kings in the first round; Elliott gave up one regulation goal in three games, two in two games and four in the other game. While it's true that Elliott gave up a couple of soft goals, the issue was goalscoring. Yet we do little to nothing to address goalscoring and are desperate to add Miller from that summer until it finally happens the next season. It's not just the Miller trade, it was the completely blinkered vision that made little sense in the circumstances.
That's good. He also got rid of him multiple times...
He assembled the scouting department and deserves the credit for the work they do.
However, if you're going to talk about Binnington, we should remember that management told Binnington that he had no future with the organisation a matter of months before being backed into the corner of starting him. That was 100% luck of circumstances. If Johnson isn't a dumpster fire, Binnington doesn't start. If Allen isn't a dumpster fire, Binnington doesn't start. If Husso isn't injured, Binnington doesn't start.
Excellent trade. Would look so much better if we had taken Timmins.
I talked about Bouwmeester above.
That Shattenkirk trade was handled poorly. One of the first things Bob McKenzie said is that other GM's around the League were annoyed because they didn't know EJ was available and didn't get to make an offer. We moved our highest value trade chip and got a RHD & RW, and then spent how many years struggling to compete because our centre depth was absolutely non-existant? I'm not going to praise that trade.
We did have a poster here that complained we didn't get ROR in the deal. It's probably a blessing that we didn't get ROR then, because I'm really not sure that it wouldn't have ended the same way here as it did in Colorado for him.
But, to be fair, we did also get "unlucky" with the EJ trade. If we don't go on an utterly meaningless winning streak in the last 10 games of the season then we were picking in the ~8 range and the first we gave up in the EJ trade get's pushed to 2012 (Jordan Schmaltz pick in the late first). If we're picking ~8 in 2011 then we're looking at Scheifele, Couturier or Hamilton.
Excellent hire, but was kept on too long.
The Allen extension was utterly bizarre and will always be bizarre. He negotiated an extension over a year before Allen was going to be a RFA, far, far earlier than he's ever dealt with a RFA.
Still, it worked out really well. If we'd have waited until after the following season then I'd hate to imagine the contract we'd be stuck with just now.
So much of a GM's work is very fine margins. Losing Pietrangelo to FA will make those margins even finer.
Louie the Blue
Because it's a trap
- Jul 27, 2010
- 4,762
- 3,099
Louie the Blue
Because it's a trap
- Jul 27, 2010
- 4,762
- 3,099
It's up there. Only reason I say ROR trade is better is due to him winning the Conn Smythe.
Time will tell on the Faulk extension. The timing of it is certainly odd, but we'll see if he's able to improve during his time here.
The C issue dates back slightly before Armstrong's time with regards to Berglund's development as well as the 2007 Draft, but I get your point.
He did attempt to address the issue with Stastny, but Stastny ultimately ended up producing as a #2 C that was paid as a #1. Other than that, I hear you.
As for a stud LD, I'd argue it was addressed fairly early on in his tenure with JBo. Armstrong's first full season was 2010-2011 with the team taking a massive step forward in 2011-2012 (which one could argue is when this current window of contention was first opened). The difference is that Armstrong's attempt to address the issue of LD was successful much sooner than his attempts at a 1C.
Correct. I'm just saying that dumping Lehtera's contract + Schenn's production make it a win for the Blues (and soon to be Flyers given the development of their players).
I did not say that Armstrong's been good at handling the goalie situation-he's been atrocious at it. He never had confidence in Elliott (which is something you mentioned below), though made a great signing of him. Miller trade was not good and Allen should've had a better backup to push him.
Binnington having the chance to play was complete luck, yes, but he/the org deserve credit for drafting him.
The return for Perron to Edmonton ended up being poor, but he needed to be moved the first time. I don't think he would've developed properly if he had stayed here (similar to Oshie).
Him being exposed to Vegas can be argued, too, but it allowed for Reaves to be traded for Sunny and Kostin.
Agreed.
Agreed
Trade may have been handled poorly, but I'd argue the Blues got the best player out of the deal. A healthy overall Shattenkirk in St. Louis > a healthy overall EJ in Colorado.
You're not wrong, but the question becomes when would you have let him go? After 2014-15? If that's your answer, then sure. But Hitch's contract status + team performance pretty much pigeonholed the Blues bringing him back in 2016-17 after 2015-16.
If Allen's contract was a detriment to bringing Petro, like you mentioned, then yeah how we view the contract would be different. But it wasn't and ultimately it was just the equivalent of Stastny's contract at goalie.
ETA: After some further thought, the Yeo hiring can also be held against Armstrong as well. The team shouldn't have been performing that poorly to begin the season.
The ONLY WAY he gets fired for not signing Pietrangelo is if he signs for like 7 mil AAV for 7 years for a different team.
Other than that easy no
Other than that easy no
- Jul 4, 2014
- 7,857
- 8,192
The problem with that position is that you still don't know whether or not he offered him more. If we offered him $64M over 8 years and he signs somewhere else for $49M over 7 years, money was not the sticking point and there is little Army can do.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,106
- 13,009
Of course not.
For starters, if ownership views Petro walking as a deal breaker, then you tell your GM that last fall. As much as we like to say that the buck stops at the GM, the reality is that ownership drives the bus on decisions of this magnitude. No GM has the authority to give out the type of contract it will take without ownership approval. Additionally, no GM has the authority to set a walkway number without ownership approval. If the owners believe that Army's walkway number is so low that they would fire him for it, then they would have instructed him to offer Petro more money.
Army may have sold ownership that his walkway number was in the franchise's best interest. If that's the case, ownership may be pissed about it and that decision may eventually cause Army to get fires if his vision doesn't work out. But that doesn't mean he gets fired right away. He would be given a year or two to demonstrate his vision and then potentially fired if/when he turns out to be wrong.
There just isn't a reality where a person is allowed to make a $60M+ decision and then get immediately fired if he makes the decision his boss doesn't like.
For starters, if ownership views Petro walking as a deal breaker, then you tell your GM that last fall. As much as we like to say that the buck stops at the GM, the reality is that ownership drives the bus on decisions of this magnitude. No GM has the authority to give out the type of contract it will take without ownership approval. Additionally, no GM has the authority to set a walkway number without ownership approval. If the owners believe that Army's walkway number is so low that they would fire him for it, then they would have instructed him to offer Petro more money.
Army may have sold ownership that his walkway number was in the franchise's best interest. If that's the case, ownership may be pissed about it and that decision may eventually cause Army to get fires if his vision doesn't work out. But that doesn't mean he gets fired right away. He would be given a year or two to demonstrate his vision and then potentially fired if/when he turns out to be wrong.
There just isn't a reality where a person is allowed to make a $60M+ decision and then get immediately fired if he makes the decision his boss doesn't like.
No need to get fired for it. It would be disappointing, but he's a year removed from a Stanley Cup. You get a grace period for that
Also, the Islanders watched Tavares walk away for nothing and we've all seen how that turned out for them. The Blues got better after Hull left. The Oilers won a Cup after Gretzky was traded.
Losing one of your best players can still turn out fine. What Armstrong does afterwards would be the bigger deal IMO.
Also, the Islanders watched Tavares walk away for nothing and we've all seen how that turned out for them. The Blues got better after Hull left. The Oilers won a Cup after Gretzky was traded.
Losing one of your best players can still turn out fine. What Armstrong does afterwards would be the bigger deal IMO.
Vektor
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2018
- 530
- 711
One of the worst posts here in years tbh.God awful extension. Thank God he's away.
Great extension, yeah? right?
Talking about great extensions what about Justin f***ing Faulk?
I haven't buy it Scandella was right move. Long way from being good enough with Parayko. He's Edmundson's level player.
And I hope this last picture flash in your consciousness when Pietro walks away, 'cus Army didn't give him enough money.
Are you shocked, you must be new here? Read my older post since 2014 and you can see this is one of the best post I've ever done.
Brockon
Cautiously optimistic realist when caffeinated.
Of Ranksu's many posts about Allen over the 3 years I've been here, this is definitely nowhere near his worst.
And of Ranksu's posts overall as a whole, his Allen posts are far from his worst ones.
I was tempted to comment congratulating him on his restraint limiting his comments to the above post you commented on, considering his strong dislike of Allen - which he voices at almost any possible chance.
Ad
Latest posts
-
GDT: WCQF | GM2 | Vegas Golden Knights at Dallas Stars | 8:30PM CT | BSSW- Latest: TatteredTornNFrayed
-
